Real View Radiology—Impact on Search Patterns and Confidence in Radiology Education

Bailey, James F.; Roth, Trenton D.; Kohli, Mark D.; Heitkamp, Darel E.

doi:10.1016/j.acra.2013.11.022

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence students profit from assuming training in radiology. Despite of the need to identify serious findings, it has been stated that students implicitly come across imaging with abnormal findings while case reading during clerkships, and while having to differentiate between normal and pathological findings, including manifold variations (Bailey et al, 2014;Kelly & Slanetz, 2015;Rohren et al, 2022). Case reading can be tracked with the pocket card's structure throughout departments.…”

Section: Keeping Track With the Rrm-pocket Cardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing the Radiology Rotation-Model-22 in Clerkships: The RRM-Pocket Card for Medical Students – Part 2

Petsch,

Buerke

2024

Eur. J. Teach. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Practical training for medical students in radiology clerkships takes place in busy clinical routine. We introduced the Radiology Rotation-Model-22 (RRM) as the department-related RRM-pocket card for student rotation (SR) settings in part one of this study. RRM was developed as a documentation tool and pocket card with department sections for radiology (10) and imaging specialties (1) for medical students in clerkships. With the RRM-tool, and while exploring departments for practical experience, students can log data details on rotations and tasks by the method of participant observation (PO). By PO, students can track SR and training progress. In part two, we present attempts on implementing the RRM-tool as a rotation concept for students to gain efficient training experience. The RRM-pocket card provides students, radiologists, and radiographers with an overview of SR and tasks. RRM can be implemented to optimise clerkships’ structure, and to generate self-action for students, while actively optimising SR.

show abstract

Section: Keeping Track With the Rrm-pocket Cardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing the Radiology Rotation-Model-22 in Clerkships: The RRM-Pocket Card for Medical Students – Part 2

Petsch,

Buerke

2024

Eur. J. Teach. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Images are then reviewed and manually manipulated by a radiologist on PACS workstations [4]. During this review, radiologists utilize sequential reading algorithms [5] to formulate medical opinions of the studies, culminating in the generation of succinct reports or interpretations [6]. Although the exam interpretation process can vary, this current study focuses only on the manual manipulation of images, as they can demand significant amounts of radiologists' time and effort.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Of Mice and Roentgen: Radiologist Satisfaction with a Non-conventional 13-Button Mouse—One Institution’s Experience

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing radiologic exam volume and complexity necessitates leveraging advanced hardware solutions to optimize workflow efficiency. We evaluated radiologist satisfaction of a programmable 13-button non-conventional mouse compared to a conventional three-button mouse in daily interpretation workflow following a brief 2-day trial period. A prospective study was conducted with radiology staff and residents in a tertiary care center from 2015 to 2016. A survey was distributed prior to and after a tutorial and a 2-day non-conventional mouse trial period. The post-survey evaluated usage time, device settings, satisfaction, preferences, and perceived efficiency of both mice. Descriptive analyses, correlations, the Sign test, and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to evaluate responses. Fifty-nine participants completed pre- and post-surveys. Several (41%, n = 24) had prior experience with a non-conventional mouse. Prior to the trial, one third of all participants (35.6%, n = 21) reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their conventional mouse. After spending an average of 9.8 h using the non-conventional mouse, there were no statistically significant changes in overall satisfaction with either conventional or non-conventional mice (p = 0.84 and p = 0.39, respectively). However, 76.3% (n = 45) agreed/somewhat agreed they preferred to use the non-conventional mouse in their daily workflow as opposed to the conventional mouse. The non-conventional mouse was also perceived as more efficient (66.1%, n = 39), required less time (62.7%, n = 37) and effort (74.6%, n = 44) to view images, allowed for easier manipulation of windows/images (76.3%, n = 45), and was more comfortable to use (78.0%, n = 46). Although there were no statistically significant shifts in overall satisfaction, participants reported a higher level of satisfaction, perceived efficiency, and preference for a non-conventional 13-button mouse compared to a conventional three-button mouse following a brief, 2-day trial period.

show abstract

Radiology Education

Kelly

2014

Academic Radiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Real View Radiology—Impact on Search Patterns and Confidence in Radiology Education

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Implementing the Radiology Rotation-Model-22 in Clerkships: The RRM-Pocket Card for Medical Students – Part 2

Implementing the Radiology Rotation-Model-22 in Clerkships: The RRM-Pocket Card for Medical Students – Part 2

Of Mice and Roentgen: Radiologist Satisfaction with a Non-conventional 13-Button Mouse—One Institution’s Experience

Radiology Education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About